THE  OBJECT 


THE 


OF 


LABOR 


BY 


> 

■> 


7. 

3  /  >  0.,  J 

’n  )  > 


)  >  j 

3  3  J 

'  '  * 


»  t  M 


,0 

)  *3  ‘ 

•  l>  4 

0  )*> 


Johann  Jakoby. 


Being  a  Speech  Delivered  Before  his  Constituency,  January  10,  1810. 


TRANSLATED  BY 

Florence  Kelley-Wischnewetzky. 


NEW  YORK: 

New  York  Labor  News  Company, 

172  First  Avenue. 

1887. 


V 


PREFACE. 


imrt 


The  speech  herewith  placed  before  the 
workers  of  America  is  the  noteworthy 
utterance  of  the  Konigsberg  physician 
and  noble  friend  of  the  working-class, 
Dr.  Johann  Jakoby,  a  democrat  in  the 
best  sense  of  the  word,  a  warm  advocate 
of  the  enlightenment  of  the  people  and 
of  the  improvement  of  their  condition. 
Johann  Jakoby,  following  the  democratic 
thought  to  its  logical  conclusion,  per¬ 
ceived  that  the  bearer  of  the  democratic 
idea  in  our  day  is  the  modern  social  de¬ 
mocracy,  and  he  the  most  eminent  of  his 
party  was  first  to  join  the  young  Social¬ 
ist  Labor  Party. 

In  America  the  old  Jefferson  democ¬ 
racy  perished  long  ago,  and  with  it  as 
with  the  democracy  of  Jakoby  the  “dem¬ 
ocratic”  party  of  to-day  has  its  name 
alone  in  common,  as  may  best  be  seen 
£  from  the  phases  of  “development” 
through  which  the  “democratic”  party 
has  passed,  the  last  stage  included.  The 
“democratic”  party  after  being  the  pro¬ 
slavery  party,  passed  through  a  phase  in 
which  it  differed  from  its  “republican” 
rival  only  in  representing  Free  Trade  as 
opposed  to  Protection.  Then,  the  Tariff 
-question  ceasing  to  serve  as  an  issue,  and 


the  old  parties  surviving  only  to  divide 
the  spoils  (to  the  shame  not  alone  of  the 
“democratic”  party,  be  it  said),  a  presi¬ 
dential  election  became  possible  which 
turned  not  upon  party  platforms  but  up¬ 
on  the  relative  decency  of  two  candi¬ 
dates.  The  rise  of  the  United  Labor 
Party  at  the  November  election  of  1886, 
which  has  been  rightly  characterized  as 
the  beginning  of  a  new  era  in  American 
politics,  lent  the  “democrats”  a  passing 
raison  d'  etre  as  “saviors  of  society,” 
representing  neither  platforms  nor  de¬ 
cency,  but  the  great  “principle”  of  “Pa¬ 
triotism.”  And  the  fusion  of  the  two 
old  parties  for  the  furtherance  of  this 
“principle”  is  only  a  question  of  time. 
Already  during  the  campaign  of  the  past 
autumn,  naively  upright  “democrats” 
who  take  “Society  Saving”  seriously, 
showered  bitter  reproaches  upon  the  ‘  ‘re¬ 
publicans”  for  their  “unpatriotic”  action 
in  nominating  separate  candidates. 
And  the  complete  fusion  of  the  “demo¬ 
crats”  with  their  kindred  spirits,  the  “re¬ 
publicans,”  will  be  delayed  so  long  only 
as  each  of  the  old  parties  may  still  hope 
to  “save”  something  for  itself.  Mean¬ 
while  the  general  saving  of  society  is  not 


4 


PREFACE. 


lost  sight  of,  and  bills  are  pending  in 
Congress  to  provide  for  the  more  effec¬ 
tive  establishment  of  the  militia,  a  point 
which  we  shall  touch  upon  later. 

One  pre  eminently  democratic  quality 
our  party  with  this  glorious  record  unmis¬ 
takably  possesses,  to  do  it  justice,  far  be¬ 
yond  all  true  democracy,  namely,  a  co¬ 
lossal  respect  for  popular  majorities.  A 
majority  it  must  have  at  all  costs,  and 
since  it  would  have  hard  work  to  con¬ 
vince  one,  it  buys  its  majority  wherever 
it  can.  Accordingly,  bribes  proving  un¬ 
availing  among  the  masses  of  workers 
now  awakening  to  a  consciousness  of 
their  class  interests,  we  behold  the  spec¬ 
tacle  of  these  worthy  “democrats”  and 
“patriots”  buying  among  the  tenement- 
house  populations  of  our  great  cities  that 
popular  majority  which  they  so  greatly 
respect.  For  the  purchase  of  a  majority 
no  sacrifice  of  money  is  too  great,  and 
every  fair-minded  person  must  admit 
that  this  is  the  heaviest  sacrifice  which  a 
party  can  make  that  represents  only  the 
interests  of  that  class  whose  domination 
in  State  and  society  rests  solely  upon  its 
possessions.  Thus  do  our  “patriots”  sac¬ 
rifice  that  which  in  their  eyes  is  most 
sacred.  It  is,  however,  a  sacrifice  that 
brings  its  own  reward. 

In  spite  of  all  this  decay  and  corrup¬ 
tion  within  the  old  parties,  the  spirit  and 
traditions  of  the  Jeffersonian  Democracy 
still  live  in  a  considerable  part  of  the 
Laboring  Class;  and  we  see  here  among 
us  in  the  person  of  Henry  George  a  man 
who  is  following  in  the  path  of  Jakoby 


and,  as  an  upright  Democrat,  lias  placed 
himself  upon  the  side  of  the  Laboring 
Class.  If  he  follows  to  the  end  the  path 
he  has  entered,  as  we  do  not  doubt  he 
will  do,  he  is,  we  believe, destined  to  play 
an  honorable  part  in  the  development  of 
the  Labor  Movement  in  America.  His 
exclusive  demand  for  the  nationalization 
of  the  land  is  totally  insufficient  for  any 
society  which  rests  upon  the  capitalist 
method  of  production,  least  of  all  for  the 
country  of  the  industrial  proletariat  par 
excellence.  If  Henry  George  extends  his 
demand  to  cover  the  demand  for  the 
socialization  of  all  the  means  of  produc¬ 
tion,  the  demand  which,  after  all,  forms 
Jhe  kernel  of  the  Labor  Question,  that 
is  to  say,  if  he  places  himself  upon  the 
standpoint  of  modern  Scientific  Socialism, 
then  only  can  he  become  a  true  repre¬ 
sentative  of  the  workers;  for  then  he 
will  express  the  actual  interests  of  the 
Laboring  Class.  Otherwise  he  will  be 
condemned  to  be  a  mere  leader  of  a  sect, 
instead  of  representing  a  mighty  and  de¬ 
cisive  Labor  Movement  which,  once 
awakened  to  class-consciousness,  is  being 
driven  by  the  logic  of  events  to  modern 
Socialism,  and  cannot  possibly  stop  with 
the  land  question.  We  say  stop  with 
the  land  question  because  the  modern 
Labor  Movement  embraces  the  land  ques¬ 
tion  as  a  matter  of  course. 

The  noble  hearted  Johann  Jakoby  ar¬ 
rived  at  his  Socialist  position,  thanks  to  his 
high  intelligence  and,  one  might  almost 
say,  to  his  healthy  instinct,  when  we 
take  into  consideration  the  backward 


PREFACE. 


5 


economic  condition  of  Germany  in  his 
day  and  the  consequent  far  from  con¬ 
spicuous  class  antagonisms. 

Wholly  different  is  the  position  of 
Henry  George.  This  can  be  clear  and 
well  considered  to  its  utmost  conse¬ 
quences.  He  has  the  good  fortune  to 
live  and  work  in  a  country  which  is  econ 
omically  and  politically  perhaps  the  most 
advanced;  in  which  the  antagonism  of 
the  classes  is  glaring,  blurred  by  no  medi¬ 
aeval  social  traditions  such  as  are  so  fre¬ 
quent  even  in  the  most  advanced  States 
of  the  Old  W orld  where  the  so-called  mid¬ 
dle  parties  base  their  existence  upon  them. 

Here,  no  one  who  has  eyes  for  the 
reality  can  fail  to  recognize  the  compara¬ 
tively  small  class  of  capitalists  mighty  by 
reason  of  their  possessions;  and  face  to 
face  with  it,  separated  by  diametrically 
opposed  interests,  by  a  gulf  that  can 
neither  be  bridged  over  nor  filled  up 
with  specious  phrases  of  harmony,  the 
Laboring  Class. 

Another  factor  must  be  especially  em¬ 
phasized  which  is  of  eminent  importance, 
namely,  the  possibility  of  clear  insight 
into  the  economic  process  going  on  about 
us  and  a  true  comprehension  of  it,  i.  e„ 
scientific  enlightenment  such  as  exists  to 
a  considerable  extent  in  the  more  progres¬ 
sive  proletarian  movements  of  Europe  and 
in  an  especially  high  degree  among  our 
German  brothers  who  can  already  point 
to  a  brilliant  political  Past. 

Our  young  Labor  Party  is  now  on  the 
way  towards  becoming  a  great  political 
party,  and  its  next  task,  as  it  has  itself 


recognized,  is  the  work  of  consolidation 
in  a  national  Party.  With  its  growth 
and  the  simultaneous  increase  in  politi¬ 
cal  influence,  the  need  of  that  enlighten¬ 
ment  which  is  now  naturally  wanting, 
will  become  more  urgent  in  order  that 
the  Labor  Party  may  press  with  full  in¬ 
telligence  towards  the  attainment  of  its 
main  object,  the  political  and  economic 
emancipation  of  the  Laboring  Class. 

The  labor  question  has  left  the  phase 
of  utopian  plans  far  behind  it.  It  has 
become  a  science,  among  whose  chief 
representatives  recognized  as  founders  of 
Modern  Scientific  Socialism  are  Karl  Marx 
and  his  lifelong  friend  and  co-worker, 
Frederick  Engels.  The  fundamental 
works  upon  Socialism,  Marx’s  Capital  and 
Engels’  Condition  of  the  Working  Class 
in  England,  have  very  recently  been  made 
accessible  in  translations  to  English-read - 
ing  workers. 

To  return  to  the  accompanying  pam¬ 
phlet.  There  are  two  points  in  which  So¬ 
cialists  to-day  will  not  agree  with  the  au¬ 
thor  as  to  the  means  by  which  the  Object 
of  the  Labor  Movement  is  to  be  attained. 

Socialists  differ  from  Jakoby  in  his  es¬ 
timate  of  profit-sharing,  finding  it  a 
measure  irrational  in  theory  and  reac¬ 
tionary  in  its  practical  working,  a  trick 
of  the  employer  to  divert  the  attention 
of  the  workers  from  their  class  interests. 

All  profit  is  produced  by  labor,  is  in 
the  ultimate  analysis  unpaid  labor.  The 
workers’  share  would  therefore  naturally 
be  the  whole  of  the  profit.  But  under 
our  present  system  the  workmen  have 


6 


PREFACE. 


/no  claim  upon  any  part  of  it.  The  whole  | 
belongs  legally  to  the  capitalist,  and  the 
workers  cannot  well  find  any  logical  ar¬ 
gument  for  claiming  a  part  of  what  is 
rightfully  theirs  and  legally  another’s.  If 
they  insist  upon  having  the  whole  of 
what  is  their  own  they  insist  upon  the 
Social  Revolution,  for  no  measure  less 
radical  can  secure  it  for  them.  But  if 
they  consent  to  be  bought  off  by  their 
plunderers  with  a  share  of  the  booty 
they  assume  a  position  which  is  not  con¬ 
ducive  to  the  speedy  abolition  of  legal- 
\  ized  robbery. 

In  practice  profit-sharing  has  been 
characterized  as  embodying  the  principle 
of  the  fly  on  the  window  pane  which, 
being  close  to  the  eye,  shut  out  the  view 
of  the  dome  of  St.  Peter’s.  For  profit- 
sharing  has  been  found  by  shrewd  em¬ 
ployers  to  occupy  the  minds  of  workers 
with  petty  economies  and  with  watching 
each  other  in  order  to  insure  the  largest 
possible  ‘  ‘share”  to  the  exclusion  of  larger 
considerations  of  class  interest.  That 
this  is  the  real  object  of  the  arrangement 
is  indicated  by  two  facts.  It  is  in  the 
employing  class  and  not  in  the  working 
class  that  profit-sharing  finds  its  apostles, 
and  this  is  an  unfailing  danger  signal. 
And  in  the  second  place,  it  is  adopted 
chiefly  by  a  certain  class  of  employers  to 
whom  it  offers  especial  advantages  in 
the  struggle  for  existence.  The  most 
powerful  monopolies  do  not  share  their 
profits  with  their  employes  because  they 
do  not  especially  need  to*  attach  the 
“hands”  to  the  “concern.”  Employers  of 


labor  upon  a  small  scale  cannot  as  a  rule 
share  profits  with  their  employes,  their 
margin  is  too  small.  It  is  the  middle- 
class  of  employers  who,  hard-pressed  to 
fight  the  large  capitalists  on  the  one 
hand  and  the  labor  organizations  on  the 
other,  are  thankful  to  buy  peace  with 
their  own  employes  upon  upon  such 
favorable  terms  as  profit-sharing  offers. 

Socialists  therefore  do  not  recommed 
profit-sharing.  If  enlightened  workers 
accept  it  when  offered  they  are  not 
thereby  blinded;  they  know  that  profit- 
sharing  bears  no  criticism  from  an  econ  • 
omic  standpoint,  but  would  if  disinter¬ 
ested,  be  mere  philanthropy;  they  know 
that  there  is  no  standard  by  which  the 
workers’  share  can  be  determined,  and 
they  fully  understand  that  the  trifling  in¬ 
crease  in  their  annual  income  is  merely 
the  price  which  employers  gladly  pay  for 
decided  advantages  obtained  in  the  econ¬ 
omy  and  intensity  of  the  labor  thus  paid 
for  and  in  the  immunity  from  strikes. 
But  Socialists  do  not,  with  Jakoby, 
recognize  profit-sharing  as  a  means  to  a. 
peaceful  solution  of  the  labor  question. 

The  second  point  upon  which  Socialists- 
will  not  agree  with  Jakoby  is  his  assump¬ 
tion  of  the  possibility  of  effort  for  a  peace¬ 
ful  solution  of  the  Labor  Question  on  the 
part  of  the  State  and  the  Capitalist  class. 

The  individual  employer  who  could 
recognize  his  employe  “as  his  own  equal 
and  treat  him  accordingly,”  gives  place 
more  and  more  to  the  corporation  “with, 
no  body  to  be  kicked  and  no  soul  to  be 
damned.”  And  it  were  folly  indeed  to> 


PREFACE. 


7 


look  to  the  capitalist  corporations  of 
America  to  promote  the  transition  to 
the  Socialist  system.  That  would  be 
asking  them  to  commit  suicide. 

Moreover  the  State  becomes  year  by 
year  more  completely  the  property,  the 
willing  tool,  of  these  same  corporations 
and  less  capable  of  action  in  the  interest 
of  the  people.  Such  slender  concessions 
as  it  makes  in  the  direction  of  protecting 
and  advancing  the  interests  of  the  work¬ 
ing  class  are  made  in  answer  to  the  de¬ 
mands  of  Labor  organized  so  powerfully 
that  its  demand  is  a  threat.  And  so  far 
as  it  dares,  the  State  of  to-day  renders 
illusory  the  trifles  that  it  yields.  If  we 
pass  in  review  the  demands  which  Johann 
Jakoby  makes  of  the  State  we  find  that, 
here  in  America,  when  the  Government 
yielded  to  the  demand  for  the  eight-hour 
working  day  for  its  employees,  the  en¬ 
forcement  of  the  law  remained  practi¬ 
cally  nil.  In  the  separate  States  the 
eight-hour  law,  wherever  passed,  is 
either  a  dead  letter  or  vitiated  in  the 
first  place  by  the  private  contract  clause. 
The  prohibition  of  the  employment  of 
children  under  fourteen  years  of  age, 
though  in  some  States  enacted,  is  gener¬ 
ally  evaded  for  want  of  adequate  inspec¬ 
tion  by  men  and  women  appointed  from 
the  working  class,  or  of  that  indispens¬ 
able  accompaniment  of  such  a  prohibi¬ 
tion,  sufficient  school  accommodation 
and  an  efficiently  enforced  compulsory 


law.  A  graduated  income  tax  could  be 
imposed  by  the  Government  only  under 
the  stress  of  the  civil  war  and  the  State 
was  the  far-too-humble  servant  of  its 
plutocratic  owners  to  attempt  stringent 
enforcement.  Instead  of  universal  com¬ 
pulsory  military  training  we  find  the 
irresponsible  mercenaries  of  the  great 
corporations,  the  Pinkerton  armed  de¬ 
tective  force,  growing  in  recklessness 
from  year  to  year;  while  the  militia, 
once  meant  to  serve  the  ends  indicated 
by  Jakoby,  has  been  perverted,  corrupted 
and  hedged  about  with  costly  conditions 
until,  to-day,  it  bears  the  character  of  a 
bourgeois  volunteer  re-enforcemont  of 
the  regular  army  maintained  by  the 
State  for  the  support  of  the  capitalists  in 
the  suppression  of  lawful  protests  of  the 
proletariat. 

It  is  evident  that  all  hope  of  help  to¬ 
wards  the  peaceful  solution  of  the  labor 
question  by  the  capitalist  class  and 
the  State  is  illusory.  The  transition 
from  the  Wage-System  to  the  Socialistic 
organization  of  society  is  going  on 
around  us  and  its  peaceful  consumma¬ 
tion  clearly  rests  with  the  W orking  Class. 
The  clearer  the  insight  of  the  workers 
the  speedier  and  more  peaceful  the 
change.  “In  proportion  as  the  proleta¬ 
riat  absorbs  socialistic  and  communistic 
elements,  will  the  Revolution  diminish 
in  bloodshed,  revenge  and  savagery.” 

F.  K.  W. 


THE  OBJECT  OF  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT. 


Fellow  Citizens  and  Friends: 

Permit  me  to-day  to  make  the  Labor 
Movement,  the  so-called  Social  Question, 
the  subject  of  my  remarks.  In  view  of 
the  close  connection  between  the  politi¬ 
cal  and  the  social  conditions  of  a  nation, 
every  constituent  has  a  well-founded 
right  to  demand  of  his  representative  a 
social  confession  of  faith  besides  his  po¬ 
litical  one.  I  shall  endeavor  to  meet  this 
demand  with  the  utmost  frankness. 

One  of  the  greatest  thinkers  of  an¬ 
tiquity,  Aristotle,  divides  the  whole  hu¬ 
man  race  into  two  classes,  free  men  and 
slave  natures.  The  Greeks  he  declares 
are  appointed  by  reason  of  their  free  na¬ 
ture  to  rule  over  other  peoples.  The  bar¬ 
barous  races  on  the  contrary,  are  fitted 
for  being  ruled  and  performing  the  ser¬ 
vices  of  slaves.  But  slavery  and  slave- 
labor  he  explains  as  a  social  necessity, 
as  the  indispensable  material  foundation 
of  State  and  Society;  for  if  the  free  citi¬ 
zens  were  obliged  to  do  the  work  re¬ 
quired  for  their  maintenance,  how  could 
they  have  the  time  and  the  wish  to  cul¬ 
tivate  their  intelligence  and  attend  to 
the  affairs  of  the  State  ?  And  yet,  Aris¬ 
totle  makes  a  remarkable  observation  as 
to  the  conceivableness  of  a  society  with¬ 


out  slavery.  If,  he  says,  an  inanimate 
object,  a  tool,  an  implement,  could  ren¬ 
der  the  service  of  the  slave,  if  every  in¬ 
strument  could  perform  its  function  at 
command  or,  still  better,  without  even  a 
command,  as  the  old  tradition  relates  of 
the  statues  of  Daedalus,  and  Homer  sings 
of  the  three  -legged  table  of  Hephaestus 
which  entered  the  halls  of  the  gods  of 
its  own  motion;  if  the  looms  could  weave 
and  the  zither  produce  its  tones  spontan¬ 
eously,  then  the  artificers  would  need 
no  helpers  and  the  masters  no  slaves. 

Now,  everyone  knows  that  the  miracle 
here  sketched  has  to  a  great  extent  been 
wrought  and  that  without  the  help  or 
intervention  of  the  gods,  in  the  most 
natural  way  in  the  world,  by  insight  into 
the  laws  of  nature  and  mastery  of  its 
forces.  What  once  seemed  impossible 
to  the  wisest  of  the  Greeks  happens 
daily  before  our  eyes.  But  how  has  the 
miracle  worked  ?  Has  the  success  which 
Aristotle  supposed,  attended  it  ?  Expe¬ 
rience  teaches  that  the  wealth  of  nations 
has  been  immeasurably  increased  by  the 
magnificent  mechanical  appliances  of 
our  time.  Yet,  the  toilsome,  anxious  lot 
of  the  laboring  class  has  been  anything 
but  lightened. 


10 


THE  OBJECT  OF  THE 


Now,  let  us  carry  this  dream  of  Aris¬ 
totle  farther  in  the  light  of  actual  expe¬ 
rience.  Let  us  assume  that  in  the  remote 
future  of  the  human  race  the  soil  of  the 
whole  earth  had  passed  into  the  hands  of 
individual  owners,  and  man  had  attained 
by  the  progress  of  knowledge  to  the  ab¬ 
solute  control  over  Nature.  Suppose  the 
perfection  of  mechanical  contrivance  to 
have  gone  so  far  that  machinery  itself  is 
produced  and  tended  by  machinery,  and 
human  labor  is  thus  minimized  if  not 
superseded.  What  would  be  the  result 
of  such  a  state  of  things?  In  conse¬ 
quence  of  the  attractive  power  which 
large  capital  exercises  upon  small,  a  com¬ 
paratively  small  number  of  wealthy 
persons  would  hold  exclusive  possession 
of  all  machinery  and  other  implements 
of  labor.  The  whole  income  of  the  na¬ 
tion,  all  the  goods  requisite  for  the 
necessities  and  enjoyments  of  life  would 
fall  to  these  few  alone  and  that  right¬ 
fully  according  to  the  views  now  current. 

Under  such  circumstances,  human 
labor  being  wholly  valueless,  what  would 
become  of  the  non-possessing  mass  if  the 
capitalists  did  not  furnish  them  the  bread 
of  charity  ?  What  else  would  remain  to 
these  unfortunates  than  to  die  of  starva¬ 
tion  or  to  reverse  the  existing  conditions 
of  production  and  possession  if  not  by 
cunning,  then  by  force  ? 

It  will  be  said  that  this  picture  is  mere¬ 
ly  a  horrible  fancy,  that  such  a  state 
of  things  can  never  be  reached.  This,  I 
admit,  not  because  the  thing  itself  is  in¬ 
conceivable  but  because  sane  men  and 


women  will  never  let  it  go  so  far.  But 
can  we  deny  that  our  present  social  life, 
founded  upon  Capitalist  rule  and  Wage- 
Labor,  moves  in  a  direction  which,  if  it 
should  continue  unchanged,  must  bring 
us  with  every  passing  day  nearer  to  the 
social  conditions  just  depicted?  Must 
we  not  admit  that  even  now,  the  income 
of  the  nation  is  distributed  in  a  manner 
which  subjects  at  least  a  part  of  the  pro¬ 
letariat  to  the  want  just  described  ? 

In  such  a  state  of  affairs  it  becomes  the 
duty  of  every  good  and  thoughtful  hu¬ 
man  being  to  ask  himself  the  question: 

“How  are  the  present  economic  and 
social  conditions  to  be  so  changed  as  to 
attain  an  equitable  distribution  of  the  in¬ 
come  of  the  people  and  to  lessen  the 
daily-increasing  poverty  of  the  work¬ 
ers  ?” 

Let  us  examine  more  closely  the  prob¬ 
lem  that  is  to  be  solved. 

Two  cardinal  features  characterize  our 
present  methods  of  production  and  dis¬ 
tinguish  them  from  those  of  the  past, 
namely,  wages  labor  and  production 
upon  a  large  scale. 

Whereas  formerly,  productive  labor 
was  chiefly  performed  by  slaves,  serfs  or 
bondsmen,  all  rights  of  ownership  in 
human  beings  ceased  at  the  French  Rev¬ 
olution.  Rightfully,  legally,  every  work¬ 
er  is  free  and  his  own  master.  But  as  a 
matter  of  fact  he  is  anything  else  rather 
than  free.  Cut  off  from  the  means  and 
conditions  of  employment,  with  no  other 
possession  than  his  labor  power,  he  is 
forced  to  work  for  wages  in  the  employ 


LABOR  MOVEMENT. 


11 


of  others,  and  for  wages  which  suffice 
at  the  utmost  for  the  bare  necessities  of 
life.  But  if  he  finds  no  purchaser  for 
the  only  commodity  at  his  command,  for 
his  force  of  labor,  he  and  his  fall  into 
the  utmost  misery.  Yet,  despite  this 
wretched  insecurity  of  his  position,  it 
will  hardly  occur  to  any  workman  to 
wish  the  old  conditions  back.  It  is  a 
life  worthy  of  man  that  he  strives  for, 
and  he  knows  that  this  can  be  attained 
only  in  a  state  of  freedom. 

As  the  French  Revolution  proclaimed 
the  workers  personally  free,  so  did  it  lib¬ 
erate  inanimate  property  from  the  last 
shackles  of  the  Middle  Ages.  Without 
reference  to  previous  restrictions  and 
obligations,  whoever  was  in  possession 
at  the  moment,  found  his  right  to  the 
absolute  control  of  his  property  recog¬ 
nized.  This  release  of  property,  the  ap¬ 
plication  of  steam  power  which  followed 
soon  after,  and  the  general  introduction 
of  machine  work  produced  a  mighty  and 
far-reaching  transformation  in  the  ex¬ 
isting  economic  and  social  conditions. 

Handicraft  and  trade  upon  a  small  scale 
were  ever  more  crowded  into  the  back¬ 
ground;  production  by  wholesale,  the 
capitalistic  method  of  production,  took 
their  place.  But  precarious  as  this 
change  has  rendered  the  lot  of  the  hand¬ 
icraftsman  without  means  and  the  small 
retail  dealer,  the  advantages  for  the 
development  of  civilization  connected 
with  production  and  distribution  upon 
a  large  scale  are  too  weighty  for  Society 
ever  to  renounce  them.  A  general  re¬ 


turn  to  production  on  a  small  scale  by 
handicraft  is  as  impossible  as  a  return  to 
slavery. 

We  must  therefore  limit  the  question 
under  consideration  as  follows :  How  can 
a  more  equal  distribution  of  the  national 
income  in  the  interest  of  all  be  attained 
without  limiting  freedom  of  labor,  and 
without  interfering  with  the  progress  of 
civilization  won  by  production  on  a  large 
scale  ? 

The  answer  cannot  be  doubtful,  for  us 
at  least.  There  is  but  one  means  to  that 
end:  ABOLITION  of  the  WAGE-SYS¬ 
TEM  and  the  substitution  for  it,  of  Co¬ 
operative  Labor. 

Whoever  has  an  open  eye  for  the  signs 
of  the  the  times  must  recognize  that  this 
thought  more  or  less  clearly  formulated 
forms  the  basis  of  the  Labor  Movement 
now  making  itself  felt  in  every  country 
in  Europe.  As  slavery  and  serfdom, once 
a  “necessary”  social  institution  also,  at 
last  made  way  for  Wage-Labor,  so  in 
our  day  there  is  coming  about  a  similar 
change  of  no  less  importance,  the  transi¬ 
tion  from  the  Wage-System  to  free  co¬ 
operative  work.  The  important  point  is 
that  the  transition  should  take  place 
in  the  most  peaceful  way.  But  this  is 
possible  only  on  condition  of  the  har¬ 
monious  activity  of  all  the  social  forces 
concerned. 

The  question  which  occupies  our  at¬ 
tention  should  therefore  finally  be  form¬ 
ulated  thus: 

What  has  the  workman,  what  has  the 
capitalist  employer,  and  what  has  the 


12 


THE  OBJECT  OF  THE 


State  to  do  to  further  the  transition  al¬ 
ready  begun  to  the  co-operative  method 
of  production,  and  to  bring  this  change  to 
its  consummation  in  the  way  most  ad¬ 
vantageous  to  the  community  ? 

W e  shall  see  that  to  answer  this  ques¬ 
tion  we  need  do  no  more  than  collate  the 
facts  before  our  eyes,  a  clear  proof  that 
the  present  age  is  in  the  midst  of  the 
process  of  social  remodelling. 

First  as  to  the  workers  themselves. 
The  main  point  is  that  they  become 
clearly  conscious  of  their  own  situation 
and  that  they  recognize  and  respect 
their  own  inherent  nobler  nature. 

I  have  stated  in  the  foregoing  that  as 
a  rule  the  worker  ’s  wages  barely  suffice 
for  scanty  maintenance  for  himself  and 
his  family.  If  any  one  doubts  this  rela¬ 
tion,  the  so-called  iron  law  of  wages,  let 
him  refer  to  the  testimony  recently  given 
by  the  Committee  of  the  German  Board 
of  Trade  in  an  opinion  upon  the  seizure 
of  wages. 

There  he  will  find,  word  for  word,  this 
statement: 

“We  cannot  let  pass  without  qualifica¬ 
tion  the  assertion  that  there  is  a  consid¬ 
erable  difference  between  the  laborer’s 
wages  and  the  means  of  subsistence  re¬ 
quisite  for  his  scant  maintenance.  It 
is  exactly  this  point,  the  rate  of  wages, 
upon  which  practically  the  whole  great 
social  question  turns.  The  workingmen 
insist  upon  the  insufficiency  of  the  wages 
rate.  The  employers  do  not  deny  this, 
but  explain  the  rate  of  wages  as  a  link  in 
the  chain  of  economic  phenomena  which 


they  cannot  arbitrarily  change  (under 
the  pressure  of  the  market  in  the  midst 
of  which  they  themselves  stand)  without 
destroying  the  whole  chain.  So  long  as 
this  controversy  is  not  settled,  and  we 
fear  it  is  an  everlasting  one  (sic),  so  long 
shall  we  be  obliged  to  maintain  the  opin¬ 
ion  as  the  only  correct  one,  that  the  ex¬ 
pressions  ‘wages  of  labor’  and  ‘necessary 
means  of  subsistence’  are  in  general 
identical.” 

The  “indestructible  chain  of  economic 
phenomena !”  Indeed  a  more  striking 
expression  could  not  have  been  found  ! 
True  the  capitalist  rulers  of  labor  are 
not  prevented  by  it  from  heaping  capital 
upon  capital,  but  heavily  does  the 
“chain  of  economic  phenomena”  press 
upon  the  laboring  class.  Yet,  even  here 
the  poet’s  word  proves  true: 

“There  dwelleth  a  spirit  of  Good  in  all  Evil.” 

The  ruling  industrial  system,  by  mak¬ 
ing  indispensable  the  assemblage  of 
masses  of  workers  at  one  point,  gives  the 
first  impulse  to  the  removal  of  the  evil 
itself  has  created.  As  man  first  sees  his 
own  features  in  the  mirror,  so  the  labor¬ 
er  first  awakens  to  a  full  appreciation  of 
his  own  pitiable  situation  when,  in  the 
misery  of  masses  of  his  comrades  in  suf¬ 
fering  the  image  of  his  own  lot  stares 
him  in  the  face.  Sharing  the  life  of  his 
companions  in  toil,  men  placed  like  him¬ 
self  and  equally  oppressed,  in  constant 
contact  and  interchange  of  thought  with 
them,  working  together  for  reciprocal 
support  and  the  common  defense  against 
common  danger,  there  arises  a  class  con- 


LABOR  MOVEMENT. 


13 


sciousness  which  sustains  and  elevates 
the  individvual  and  inspires  the  masses 
to  battle  for  their  social  rights.  It  is  a 
strange  fate  which  decrees  that  Capitalist 
production  itself  shall  assemble  and  drill 
the  powers  destined  to  make  an  end  of 
capitalist  and  class  rule. 

From  the  great  central  rallying  places 
of  industry  the  Labor  Movement  has 
proceeded,  which  within  a  few  decades 
has  spread  from  England  over  France, 
Belgium,  Germany  and  Switzerland,  and 
has  attained  power  and  definite  form  in 
the  foundation  of  the  International 
Workingmen’s  Association.  Every¬ 
where  we  see  unions  forming  whose  ob¬ 
ject  is  the  improvement  of  the  material 
condition  of  the  laboring  class;  crafts¬ 
men’s  guilds  and  workingmen’s  clubs, 
educational  and  beneficial  associations, 
co-operative,  loan  and  credit  societies, 
trades  unions  and  co-operative  manufac¬ 
turing  companies.  Under  the  prevail¬ 
ing  conditions  of  credit  and  production 
all  these  undertakings,  originating  in  the 
working  class  and  resting  upon  the  prin¬ 
ciple  of  self-help  must  x^rove  x^oweriess 
to  cure  the  misery  of  the  masses.  But 
they  have  acconrplished  a  vast  work  for 
the  intellectual  and  moral  elevation  of 
the  laboring  class  and  in  leaving  the 
way  for  a  thorough  reform  of  labor. 
The  true  significance  of  these  associa¬ 
tions,  their  value  which  cannot  be  over¬ 
estimated  lies  in  this  that,  wholly  ax>art 
from  the  esx>ecial  object  at  which  they 
aim,  they  are  a  school  for  self -culture  for 
their  members;  that  they  confer  upon 


them  skill  in  the  independent  manage¬ 
ment  of  their  own  affairs  and  in  harmo¬ 
nious  action  with  others  for  common 
ends;  that  by  education,  x>romotion  of  a 
comprehension  of  business  and  fraternal 
imblic  spirit  they  prepare  the  worker 
for  a  gradual  transition  from  the  pre- 
vailing  W age-System  to  the  co-ox>erative 
method  of  x>roduction  of  the  future. 

It  was  the  spirit  of  co-operation  which 
in  the  the  Middle  Ages  raised  the  work¬ 
ing  middle  class  to  so  high  a  level  of 
culture  and  prosperity,  of  x^ower  and 
consequence.  The  re-awakening  of  the 
spirit  of  co-operation  in  our  day  will 
bear  similar  and  still  more  x>recious  fruit, 
not  for  one  class  alone  but  for  the  whole 
human  society.  The  labor  question  as 
we  aiyprehend  it,  is  no  mere  stomach 
and  money  question,  it  is  a  question  of 
Civilization,  Justice  and  Humanitv. 
When  our  saving  of  State  and  Society, 
the  “glorious”  achievements  of  our 
policy  of  blood  and  iron  like  a  lost  tradi¬ 
tion  shall  long  have  been  forgotten,  it 
will  be  remembered  to  the  credit  of  our 
time  that  it  quickened  and  cherished  the 
spirit  of  co-operation,  the  germ  of  hu¬ 
man  greatness  and  virtue  in  the  labor¬ 
ing  world,  so  laying  the  foundation  for 
a  new  and  truly  moral  social  life  which 
shall  rest  upon  the  principle  of  equality 
and  fraternity.  The  founding  of  the 
smallest  workingmen’s  club  will  be  for 
the  historian  of  Civilization  of  greater 
worth  than — the  victory  of  Sadowa. 

Let  us  x^ass  to  the  second  question: 

What  has  the  employer  to  do  ? 


14 


THE  OBJECT  OF  THE 


The  demand  that  we  make  of  him  is 
simply  this,  that  he  respect  in  every 
worker  the  human  being,  that  he  recog¬ 
nize  the  laborer  whom  he  employs  as  a 
being  fully  his  own  equal,  and  that  he 
treat  him  accordingly. 

Everything,  they  say,  has  two  sides. 
In  this  every-day  saying  lurks  a  good 
piece  of  popular  wisdom; — the  most  diffi¬ 
cult  problems  of  knowledge  as  of  life  find 
their  solution  in  it.  Like  everything 
else  man  himself  has  two  sides,  a  per¬ 
sonal  one  peculiar  to  himself  as  an  indi¬ 
vidual,  and  a  universal  one  which  marks 
him  as  a  member  of  a  greater  whole. 
In  reality  the  two  sides  can  neither  be 
separated  nor  sharply  distinguished,  for 
it  is  the  two  taken  together  which  in 
their  unity,  make  the  man.  But  in  our 
consciousness  temporarily  or  permanent¬ 
ly  one  side  or  the  other  can  very  well 
press  into  the  foreground  and  assert  a 
predominant  influence  upon  our  thought 
and  action.  Let  us  assume  the  case 
that  the  special,  individual  side  predom¬ 
inates  in  a  man’s  character.  It  would 
find  expression  primarily  in  his  estimate 
of  himself,  as  self-consciousness,  self- 
confidence.  “Help  yourself,”  “Hercules 
helps  him  who  helps  himself,”  becomes 
such  a  man’s  maxim,  the  rule  of  his 
thought  and  action.  If  he  retains  the 
consciousness  of  the  other  universal  side 
of  his  nature,  not  losing  sight  of  the 
connection  between  himself  and  his  fel¬ 
low  men,  he  will  admit  that  his  own 
powers  do  not  suffice  to  obtain  him  by 
his  personal  effort  alone,  a  subsistence 


worthy  of  a  human  being;  that  man  can 
live  and  prosper  only  in  society,  that 
brotherly  co-operation  with  others  there¬ 
fore  lies  in  his  own  interest.  Respect 
for  others,  sympathy  and  public  spirit 
will  hold  his  self-consciousness  and  self- 
confidence  properly  in  check.  Quite 
otherwise  if  the  consciousness  of  self 
gets  the  upper  hand  in  a  man.  True, 
the  insufficiency  of  his  own  unaided 
powers  cannot  escape  him  even  then, 
for  the  consciousness  of  the  broad,  uni¬ 
versal  side  cannot  be  wholly  suppressed. 
But  the  conclusion  which  he  draws  from 
it  is  in  this  case  different,  he  will  regard 
others  not  as  his  equals,  not  as  equal 
members  of  a  great  whole,  of  which  he, 
too,  forms  a  part,  but  as  subservient  to 
himself,  mere  tools  for  satisfying  his 
needs  and  gratifying  his  desires.  Thus 
the  consciousness  of  self,  praiseworthy 
enough  in  its  place,  deteriorates  into  self¬ 
ishness,  and  self-consciousness  into  con¬ 
ceit.  Selfishness,  pretension  and  the 
desire  to  rule  tempt  him  to  make  his 
fellow  men  serve  his  own  will,  all  that 
he  believes  to  be  for  his  own  advantage. 

What  is  here  said  of  the  individual 
applies  to  the  whole  community.  The 
same  powers  which  are  active  in  the 
mind  of  the  individual  make  themselves 
felt  in  the  life  of  peoples,  in  the  history 
of  the  human  race. 

The  power  of  man  over  man,  the  right 
of  the  strong  and  the  oppression  of  the 
weak,  that  is  the  characteristic  feature, 
the  scarlet  thread  that  is  woven  into  the 
history  of  antiquity  and  of  the  Middle 


LABOR  MOVEMENT. 


15 


Ages.  And  is  it  otherwise  now  ? 

Does  not  the  order  of  society  to-day, 
rest  in  spite  of  the  much-praised  prog¬ 
ress  of  Civilization,  upon  the  same  prin¬ 
ciple  of  human  subservience  ?  Has  the 
Present  a  right  to  look  back  to  the  con¬ 
ditions  of  heathen  antiquity  and  of  the 
Christian  Middle  Ages  with  pride  and 
self-satisfaction  ? 

With  a  frankness  which  leaves  nothing 
to  be  desired  a  statesman  of  the  Nine¬ 
teenth  Century,  Count  Joseph  de  Maistre, 
has  expressed  himself,  literally,  thus: 

“The  human  race  was  created  for  the 
benefit  of  a  few  men.  It  is  the  business  of 
the  clergy,  the  aristocracy,  and  the  higher 
officers  of  the  State  to  teach  the  people 
what  is  good  or  bad,  true  or  false  in 
the  worlds  of  morals  and  intellect. 
Other  persons  have  no  right  to  dispute 
about  such  matters,  they  must  endure 
without  murmuring.” 

If  this  is  rather  highly  colored,  the 
picture  is  none  the  less  drawn  from  na¬ 
ture.  So  long  as  the  shepherds  of  the 
nations  go  to  war  without  saying  “by 
your  leave”  to  the  people,  so  long  as  ec¬ 
clesiastics  come  together  in  council  and 
synod  “To  judge  false  human  science 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Holy  Ghost,” 
so  long  we  have  no  right  to  accuse  de 
Maistre  of  falsehood.  But  wrong  and 
incomprehensible  it  is  that  de  Maistre 
approves  this  state  of  things,  that  he 
dreams  such  conditions  can  and  will  en¬ 
dure  for  all  time. 

Let  me  produce  another  witness: 

Robert  Owen,  the  founder  of  the  co¬ 


operative  system  in  England,  once  met 
in  the  house  of  a  Frankfort  banker  Fred- 
rich  von  Gentz,  the  well-known  states¬ 
man.  Owen  set  forth  the  excellence  of 
his  socialistic  system  and  observed: 

‘  Tf  only  unity  could  replace  disunion 
all  men  would  have  enough  to  live 
upon.” 

“That  may  be  true,”  replied  von 
Gentz,  “but  we  do  not  wish  the  masses 
to  be  prosperous  and  independent  of  us, 
for  how  could  we  then  continue  to  gov¬ 
ern  ?” 

There  we  have  the  whole  Social  Ques¬ 
tion  of  the  present  in  a  nutshell !  If 
Owen  speaks  the  Eword  of  deliverance, 
the  Unity  of  Mankind,  Gentz  proclaims 
the  fundamental  evil  that  stands  in  the 
way  of  redemption:  the  love  of  power  of 
the  more  favored  classes.  Aristotle  also 
divided  mankind,  it  will  be  remembered, 
into  two  classes,  such  as  are  destined  to 
command  and  such  as  are  born  to  serve. 
But  it  was  difference  of  nationality,  as 
between  Greeks  and  Barbarians,  which 
lay  at  the  foundation  of  his  distinction. 
Gentz  and  de  Maistre  on  the  contrary 
draw  a  dividing  line  within  the  same 
race,  between  the  upper  ten  thousand 
who  are  ordained  to  rule  and  prosper, 
and  the  remaining  masses  destined  to  be 
governed  and  to  languish. 

Whether  we  examine  the  state  of  the 
Church,  the  State  or  Society  everywhere 
— we  cannot  ignore  it — we  meet  with 
the  class  rule  of  the  Middle  Ages,  the 
mediaeval  system  of  guardianship.  In 
one  point  only  does  the  Present  differ 


16 


THE  OBJECT  OF  THE 


from  the  Past,  namely  that,  thanks  to 
the  German  Reformation  and  the  French 
Revolution,  the  conviction  gains  ground 
from  day  to  day  in  ever-widening  circles 
down  to  the  lowest  strata,  that  it  cannot 
go  on  so  forever,  that  men  are  not  cre¬ 
ated  to  he  ruled  and  governed,  held  in 
leading  strings  and  oppressed  by  their 
fellow  men.  For  thousands  of  years 
love  of  one’s  neighbor  and  the  fellow¬ 
ship  of  man  have  been  preached  to  the 
people.  The  present  demands  that  in 
every  deed,  in  daily  life,  in  the  State  and 
Society  this  teaching  be  applied  in 
earnest. 

There  was  a  time — the  older  men 
among  you  remember  it — when  everyone 
who  doubted  the  right  of  absolute  gov¬ 
ernment  was  branded  a  rebel.  To-day 
a  similar  fate  is  the  lot  of  everyone  who 
ventures  to  lay  hands  upon  the  “chain 
of  economic  phenomena.”  Do  but  ven¬ 
ture  to  attack  the  privilege  of  the  pos¬ 
sessing  class,  the  abuse  of  power  by  Cap¬ 
ital,  the  prevailing  credit  and  loan  sys¬ 
tem,  or  even  to  broach  a  more  equal  dis¬ 
tribution  of  material  goods,  and  you  are 
in  certain  circles  branded  forthwith  as 
the  enemy  of  all  social  order,  a  social 
heretic,  a  Communist.  But  this  shall 
not  deter  me  from  recognizing  freely 
and  publicly  that  all  individual.property, 
material  not  less  than  intellectual,  is  the 
common  good  of  society.  Like  man 
himself,  every  form  of  the  property  of 
man  possesses,  besides  its  special  charac¬ 
ter  which  makes  it  the  private  possession 
of  an  individual,  a  universal  side  which 


gives  the  community  a  well-grounded 
claim  to  a  right  to  it.  That  the  State 
and  the  municipality  appropriate  a  part 
of  the  property  of  every  citizen  as  taxes 
we  all  consider  a  matter  of  course,  or 
that  the  law  limits  the  free  control  of 
the  individual’s  property.  But,  we  ask, 
has  the  property-holder  no  other  duties 
than  those  which  the  law  of  the  land 
prescribes  and  in  case  of  need  compels 
him  to  fulfill  ?  Has  he  not  duties  to  so¬ 
ciety  as  well  as  to  the  family,  the  munic¬ 
ipality,  the  commonwealth  ?  What  the 
individual  calls  his  own,  whether  of  real 
or  personal  property,  is  it,  can  it  be 
solely  the  product  of  his  own  activity? 
Does  he  not  owe  by  far  the  greater  part 
of  it  to  the  co-operation  of  others,  to  the 
social  labor,  the  labor  in  common,  of 
the  people  who  have  lived  before  him 
and  of  his  contemporaries  ?  And  as  the 
individual  attains  possession  of  property 
only  by  means  of  the  help  of  others,  so 
he  cannot  enjoy  its  fruits  without  the 
help  of  others.  Only  in  society  lias 
property  value,  only  in  society  can  man 
rejoice  in  it.  Hence  the  moral  obliga¬ 
tion  of  every  owner  of  property  so  to 
use  his  fortune  that  it  may  be  of  use  not 
to  himself  alone  but  to  the  community 
as  well,  especially  to  those  of  his  fellow 
men  who  are  less  favorably  placed  than 
himself. 

The  grand  Labor  Movement  of  the 
last  forty  years  has  had  a  wholesome 
effect  in  this  respect.  As  it  has  awak¬ 
ened  in  the  workman  the  consciousness 
of  his  social  rights,  so  has  it  sharpened 


LABOR  MOVEMENT. 


17 


in  the  possessing  class  the  sense  of  social 
duty. 

We  are  glad  to  admit  that  there  are 
employers  for  whom  the  laborer  is  not 
a  commodity  which  one  buys  as  cheaply 
as  possible,  like  every  other  commodity, 
to  make  the  most  of  the  use  of  it.  In 
England,  France,  and  even  with  ns  in 
Germany,  there  is  no  lack  of  individual 
examples  of  mill-owners,  business  men 
and  landlords  who  endeavor  to  improve 
the  sad  lot  of  their  employes  through 
increase  in  wages,  or  shortening  the 
hours  of  labor,  the  foundation  of  savings- 
banks,  beneficial  societies  and  insurance 
for  old  age,  or  by  the  erection  of  health¬ 
ful  dwellings,  asylums,  hospitals,  educa¬ 
tional  institutions,  and  other  means. 
Especially  worthy  of  notice  in  this  res¬ 
pect  is  the  system  of  profit-sharing, 
according  to  which  the  workman  re¬ 
ceives  besides  his  wages  a  regular  share 
of  the  profit  obtained  by  his  labor.  In 
England  alone  there  are  some  ten 
thousand  workmen  who  hold  this  rela¬ 
tion  to  their  employer,  and  both  sides 
have  reason  to  be  content  with  their  suc¬ 
cess.  Yet,  we  must  not  overlook  the  fact 
that  here  everything  depends  more  or 
less  upon  the  good  will  of  the  employer, 
and  that  in  the  best  case  certain  work¬ 
ingmen  or  groups  of  workingmen  only 
are  benefitted  by  it.  Valuable  as  such 
humane  endeavors  are  as  educational 
preparation  for  the  removal  of  the  social 
wretchedness  which  has  arisen  out  of 
the  wages  system  they  are  as  little  ade¬ 
quate  as  the  workmen’s  attempt  at  self¬ 


help.  That  great  task  requires  another 
power,  capable  of  taking  general  and 
radical  measures.  And  this  brings  us  to 
the  third  question: 

What  has  the  State  to  do  to  bring 
about  a  peaceful  solution  of  the  Labor 
Question  ? 

The  new  constitution  of  the  Canton 
Zurich  adopted  April  18tli,  1869,  answers 
our  question  as  follows: 

Art.  23.  “The  State  promotes  and 
facilitates  the  development  of  the  co¬ 
operative  system  based  upon  self-help. 
It  enacts  through  its  law-giving  power 
the  pro visions  requisite  for  the  protection 
of  the  workers.” 

Art.  24.  “It  creates,  for  the  further¬ 
ance  of  the  general  credit,  a  Cantonal 
bank.” 

The  original  wording  of  the  articles 
was  still  more  precise.  It  was  as  follows: 
Art.  23.  “It  is  the  duty  of  the  State  to 
protect  and  advance  the  welfare  of  the 
working  class  and  the  development  of 
the  co-operative  system.” 

Art.  24.  (As  above). 

Protection,  Advancement — in  these 
two  words  the  object  of  the  great  co¬ 
operative  body  which  we  call  the  State 
is  sharply  and  clearly  formulated.  But 
how  are  protection  by  the  State  and 
advancement  by  the  State  to  be  under¬ 
stood  ?  The  despot  calls  himself  shield 
and  protector  of  the  people,  and  war  is 
praised  as  a  means  of  promoting  civili¬ 
zation.  Vera  rerum  vocdbula  amissimus, 
the  right  names  of  things  are  lost  to  us. 
The  more  need  then  to  specify  the  sense 


18 


THE  OBJECT  OF  THE 


in  which  the  terms  are  here  used. 

“Protection  by  the  State”  means  the 
duty  of  the  whole  body  of  persons  as¬ 
sembled  and  united  into  a  State  to  pro¬ 
tect  each  individual  in  the  free  develop¬ 
ment  and  employment  of  his  power  so 
far  as  the  like  freedom  of  others  is  not 
thereby  interfered  with. 

But  with  mere  protection  the  duty  of 
the  State  is  not  exhausted,  however  much 
the  politician  may  prefer  to  limit  it 
thereto.  The  reciprocal  advancement 
of  the  members  of  the  State  must  be 
added. 

Under  advancement  by  the  State  we 
understand  the  duty  of  the  whole  commu¬ 
nity  to  step  in  with  its  means  wherever 
the  welfare  of  the  individual  does  not 
suffice  to  obtain  him  a  life  worthy  of  a 
human  being. 

As  protection  by  the  State  corresponds 
to  the  principle  of  Liberty,  and  Ad¬ 
vancement  by  the  State  to  the  principle 
of  Fraternity,  so  the  assurance  of  pro¬ 
tection  and  advancement  to  all,  “to  each 
according  to  his  need,”  meets  the  de¬ 
mand  of  Equality. 

This  doctrine  of  the  object  of  the  State 
is  quite  the  same  as  that  which  I  ex¬ 
pressed  on  a  former  occasion  in  the 
formula: 

Each  for  all— is  human  Duty  ! 

All  for  each — is  human  Right; 

“But,”  some  one  may  object,  “if  protec¬ 
tion  and  advancement  by  the  State  are 
to  be  afforded  to  all  equally,  why  is  the 
working  class  especially  emphasized  in 
the  article  of  the  Zurich  constitution  ? 


Is  the  working  class  to  be  especially  fa¬ 
vored  by  the  State,  advanced  at  the 
cost  of  the  others  ?” 

Reasonable  as  this  objection  at  first 
sounds,  it  does  not  bear  scrutiny. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  the  equal¬ 
ity  of  all  consists  solely  in  every  man’s, 
being  protected  and  helped  ‘  ‘according 
to  his  need;”  and  who  can  deny  that  at 
this  time  it  is  precisely  the  wage-worker 
who  most  needs  protection  and  help  ? 

But  wholly  apart  from  this  greater 
need,  there  is  another  circumstance 
which,  for  the  Present  and  the  immedi¬ 
ate  Future,  makes  an  especial  considera¬ 
tion  of  the  working  class  by  the  State  a 
demand  of  reparative  justice. 

It  is  only  necessary  to  call  to  mind  the 
genesis  of  what  is  commonly  called  cap¬ 
ital  to  make  this  perfectly  clear.  How¬ 
ever  the  definitions  of  capital  may  differ, 
in  this  they  all  agree,  that  it  is  accumu¬ 
lated  labor,  applicable  to  further  pro¬ 
ductive  ends.  But  who  has  performed 
this  labor?  They,  perhaps,  who  now 
control  capital !  Does  the  manufactur¬ 
er,  the  merchant,  the  landlord,  owe  his 
wealth  of  accumulated  labor  to  his  own 
activity  and  the  industry  of  his  ancestors  ? 
Is  the  want  of  capital,  the  poverty  of 
the  toiling  proletarians  solely  due  to 
their  own  and  their  fathers’  fault  ?  But 
if  the  present  inequality  of  fortune  is 
not  solely  due  to  the  economically  cor¬ 
rect  action  of  the  property-holding  class 
and  the  shiftlessness  of  the  non-possess¬ 
ing  class,  to  what  other  cause  can  it  be 
attributed  ?  Whence  comes  it  that  Cap- 


LABOR  MOVEMENT. 


19 


ital  concentrates  more  and  more  in 
the  hands  of  the  small  minority  while 
the  mass  of  wage-laborers,  despite  their 
industry,  can  scarcely  satisfy  their  barest 
needs  ?  The  reason  for  this  can  evident¬ 
ly  be  found  nowhere  else  than  in  a  dis¬ 
tribution  of  the  product  of  labor  dis¬ 
proportionate  to  the  labor  performed, 
and  therefore,  unjust. 

W e  shall  not  investigate  the  chain  of 
historical  conditions  in  consequence  of 
which  the  workman  was  gradually  sep¬ 
arated  from  the  means  of  production  and 
the  present  disproportion  between  work 
and  wages  brought  about.  The  question 
now  is: 

What  has  the  State  done  to 'bring  about 
a  more  just  distribution  of  the  product 
of  labor?  Has  it  made  any  attempt  by 
legislation  or  otherwise  to  protect  the 
workingman  against  the  superior  power 
of  capital  or  to  set  a  limit  to  the  social 
inequality  that  is  growing  from  day  to 
day? 

Whoever  scrutinizes  the  history  of  the 
nations  down  to  the  present  day  will 
find  that  in  this  direction  practically 
nothing  has  been  done. 

Nobility,  clergy  and  the  higher  digni¬ 
taries  of  State  have  separately  and  to¬ 
gether  exercised  an  almost  exclusive 
control  in  public  affairs;  they  have  not 
hesitated  to  turn  to  account  for  them¬ 
selves  and  their  own  interests  power  and 
wealth  from  which  all  should  have  prof¬ 
ited  equally.  Legislation  itself,  far  from 
distributing  air  and  sunshine  equitably 
in  the  economic  race,  has  contributed  its 


large  share  by  conferring  privileges  on 
the  one  hand  and  interfering^with  liber¬ 
ty  on  the  other,  to  widen  and.  deepen 
the  chasm  between  the  property-holding 
and  the  non-possessing  classes. 

How  then  can  any  one  blame  the  men 
of  toil,  if,  having  awakened  to  the  con¬ 
sciousness  of  their  rights  and  their 
power,  they  demand  from  the  State  a 
very  special  consideration  of  their  so 
long  neglected  interests?  When,  in  the 
article  of  the  Zurich  Constitution,  State 
protection  and  State  help  is  especially 
promised  to  the  workers,  there  is  in¬ 
volved  in  this  no  infringement’upon  the 
principle  of  equality.  There  is  no 
question,  as  some  anxious  souls  fear,  of 
feeding  the  poor  working  man  at  the 
cost  of  the  rich  citizen;  still  less  of  form¬ 
ing  a  privileged  class  of  workingmen, 
stipendiaries  of  the  government.  It  is 
simply  the  frank  and  honorably  out¬ 
spoken  recognition  by  the  law-givers  of 
the  State's  duty  to  do  that  which  has 
been  left  undone  and  to  expiate  injus¬ 
tice  committed,  so  righting  the  social 
wrong  for  which  the  State  is,  in  part, 
responsible.  It  is  only  the  wished-for 
fulfillment  of  that  which  we  have  called 
the  demand  for  reconciliating  and  rep¬ 
arative  justice. 

But  the  Zurich  Constitution  does  not 
stop  with  the  recognition  of  the  duty 
and  responsibility  of  the  State  in  general, 
it  specifies  in  precise  terms  the  means  by 
which  alone  the  working  class  can  now 
be  helped: 

“The  development  of  co-operation 


20 


THE  OBJECT  OF  THE 


based  upon  self-help  shall  be  promoted 
and  assisted.” 

The  ultimate  object  of  this  process  of 
development  is:  The  abolition  of  wages- 
labor  by  the  gradual  transition  from 
the  wages  system  to  that  of  co-oper¬ 
ative  labor. 

Let  us  glance  now  in  detail  at  the 
demands  to  be  made  of  the  State,  i.  e., 
the  whole  community  of  individuals. 

First  comes  unrestricted  freedom  of 
opinion  and  the  right  to  organize  and 
hold  meetings  at  will.  The  repeal  of  all 
laws  framed  for  the  purpose  of  limiting 
or,  as  the  phrase  goes,  “regulating” 
liberty.  Next,  equal  right  of  participa¬ 
tion  in  public  affairs  for  all,  universal, 
direct  suffrage  and  its  corollary, universal 
direct  participation  of  the  people  in  leg¬ 
islation  and  administration.  Further, 
free  compulsory  education  in  public 
secular  institutions  and  the  introduction 
of  universal  compulsory  military  train¬ 
ing  in  place  of  standing  army  and 
militia.  These  two  demands  we  com¬ 
bine  because  public  instruction  and  the 
peoples’  power  of  defense  are  most 
closely  connected.  For  the  conduct  of 
war  the  primary  need  is  money  and  effi¬ 
cient  soldiers;  both  are  secured  by  effi¬ 
cient  schools.  The  wealth  of  a  country 
depends  upon  the  successful  labor  of  its 
inhabitants,  but  work  is  the  more  suc¬ 
cessful  the  better  the  workman  can  cal¬ 
culate  the  success  of  what  he  undertakes, 
that  is,  the  more  intelligent  he  is.  And 
the  soldier,  like  the  workman,  will  be 
more  skillful  in  the  performance  of  his 


task,  the  defense  of  his  country.  With 
us  in  Germany,  as  in  most  of  the  countries 
of  Europe,  nearly  half  of  the  nation’s 
income  is  spent  in  preparation  for  war, 
while  education  and  culture  are  put  off 
with  sums  scarcely  worth  mentioning. 
Let  us  reverse  the  proportion  and  the 
people’s  wealth  will  multiply  ten-fold 
without  injury  to  our  power  of  defense, 
A  Minister  of  Education  who  under¬ 
stands  his  business  is  the  best  Minister 
of  Finance  and  War. 

For  the  working  class  especially,  and 
that  in  the  interest  of  the  Commonwealth, 
we  demand: 

SHORTENED  HOURS  OF  LABOR  AND  A  LEGAL 
WORKING  DAY. 

The  wage-worker,  too,  must  have 
time  and  leisure  “to  cultivate  his  intelli¬ 
gence  and  attend  to  the  affairs  of  State.” 
The  Congress  of  English  Trades  Unions, 
held  last  year  in  Birmingham,  recom¬ 
mended  the  eight-hour  working  day  for 
all  trades,  and  expressed  its  conviction 
that  by  this  means  “the  physical  and 
mental  power  of  the  workers  will  be  in¬ 
creased  and  morality  promoted  and  the 
number  of  the  unemployed  diminished.” 

Prohibition  of  the  employment  of  Chil¬ 
dren  and  equal  pay  for  equal  work  for 
Men  and  Women. 

Both  are  necessary  to  prevent  the 
further  sinking  of  wages  and  to  save  the 
rising  generation  from  deterioration. 

Abolition  of  indirect  Taxes  and  intro¬ 
duction  of  a  Progressive  Income  Tax. 

Every  tax  upon  necessaries  of  life  is  a 


LABOR  MOVEMENT. 


21 


tax  upon  the  worker’s  force  of  labor, 
hence  a  restriction  upon  production  and 
an  injury  to  the  prosperity  of  the 
people. 

Finally:  Reform  of  the  Money  and 
Credit  System,  and  promotion  of  Indus¬ 
trial  and  Agricultural  Productive  Co¬ 
operative  Associations  by  the  intervention 
of  State  Credit  or  State  Guaranty. 

The  point  is  to  make  credit  accessible 
to  the  working  class.  This  the  State  has 
done  in  most  generous  measure  both 
directly  and  indirectly  for  the  promo 
tion  of  the  capitalistic  method  of  pro¬ 
duction.  Let  the  State  now  in  its  own 
interest  do  the  same  for  the  co-operative 
associations  of  the  workers.  Nothing  is 
more  advantageous  to  the  Common¬ 
wealth  than  justice  in  all  things.’ 

So  much  for  the  preliminary  condi¬ 
tions  of  labor  reform.  The  working¬ 
men  have  been  advised,  perhaps  honestly 
enough,  to  keep  out  of  politics  and  busy 
themselves  solely  with  their  economic 
interests,  as  if  political  and  economic  in¬ 
terests  could  be  separated  as  kindlings 
are  split,  with  a  hatchet.  Whoever  has 
followed  our  line  of  reasoning  thus  far 
cannot,  I  think,  be  in  doubt  that  pre¬ 
cisely  the  working  class  must  first  of  all 
and  most  of  all  resolve  to  transform  po¬ 
litical  conditions  in  the  direction  of 
freedom.  State-help  no  less  than  self- 
help  is  needed  for  securing  to  the  work¬ 
er  the  full,  undiminished  result  of  his 
industry,  that  is,  an  existence  worthy  of 
a  man. 


The  State  alone,  and  only  a  free  State 
will  help  the  workers  ! 

Let  us  sum  up  briefly,  the  substance 
of  the  foregoing: 

The  system  of  wages-labor  meets  the 
demands  of  Justice  and  Humanity  as 
little  as  did  the  slavery  and  servitude  of 
former  times.  Like  slavery  and  servi¬ 
tude,  wages-labor  was  once  a  step 
forward  in  civilization  from  which  un¬ 
deniable  advantages  have  accrued  to 
society. 

The  social  question  of  the  Present  is 
how  to  abolish  the  wages  system  without 
losing  the  advantages  of  production  and 
distribution  en  gros  by  means  of  associ¬ 
ated  labor. 

To  this  end  there  is  but  one  means,  the 
system  of  free  associated  labor,  the  co¬ 
operative  system.  The  Present  is  a 
time  of  transition  from  the  wages  sys¬ 
tem  (capitalistic  method  of  production) 
to  the  system  of  Associated  Labor. 

In  order  to  secure  a  peaceful  transition, 
the  worker,  the  employer  and  the  State 
must  work  together: 

It  is  the  part  of  the  workers  to  offer 
united  resistance  to  the  pressure  of  cap¬ 
italistic  rule,  and  by  self-culture  to  pre¬ 
pare  themselves  for  independence. 

It  is  the  part  of  the  employer  to  con¬ 
cern  himself  for  the  welfare  of  the  work¬ 
ers,  and  especially  to  yield  them  a  share 
of  the  profits. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  State  to  promote 
the  efforts  of  the  workers  for  self-culture 
by  promoting  their  organization,  deter¬ 
mining  a  legal  working  day  and  afford- 


LABOR  MOVEMENT. 


ing  adequate  opportunity  for  free  in¬ 
struction.  It  is  the  further  duty  of  the 
State  to  assist  the  development  of  the 
co-operative  system  by  reform  of  the 
bank  and  credit  system  and  by  affording 
to  co-operative  effort  the  support  of 
State-credit. 

Such  help  being  possible  only  on  the 
part  of  a  free  State,  it  follows  that  all 
workers,  and  all  friends  of  the  workers, 
must  aim  primarily  at  establishing  true 
freedom  within  the  State.  Political  and 
social  freedom,  freedom  of  the  citizen 
without  the  sacrifice  of  the  majority  of 
mankind  as  wage-slaves;  this  is  the  task 
of  our  century.  The  achievements  of 
the  policy  of  blood  and  iron,  the  clang 


of  arms  in  these,  our  days,  the  chase  and 
struggle  for  wealth  and  sensual  enjoy¬ 
ment,  these  are  but  ripples  upon  the 
surface  of  the  stream  of  the  spirit  of 
our  time.  In  the  depths,  still  but  cease¬ 
less  is  the  forward  movement  of  our 
knowledge  of  nature  and  of  mind,  and 
with  this  knowledge  the  consciousness 
of  the  sovereignty  of  man,  that  thought 
which  moves  the  world,  the  Liberty, 
Equality,  Fraternity  of  all.  Though 
years  may  pass  in  vain,  the  word  of 
scripture  shall  yet  be  fulfilled,  the  joy¬ 
ful  message  which  the  electric  wire  sped 
as  its  first  greeting  from  free  America  to 
Europe  still  armed  to  the  teeth: 

“Peace  on  Earth;  Good  Will  to  Men  !” 


THE 


END. 


- 

-  ' 


If  f|v‘. 

. 


- 


. 


■  ■ 


' 


!■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ 


■■■■■■■■■■a 


■■■■■■■■« 


■  .T;rnrr 


!■■■■■■■■■■■ 


TIT 


PI1L.I 


■■■■■■■■■■■■a 


a  a  a 


a  a  a  a  a  a 


. 


MONTHLY 

SUBSCRIPTION  PRICE, 

$2.50. 


■  >  .  ■ 


■! 


iliViVNv  «3 


a  a  a  a 


a  a  a  a  a  a  a 


a  a  a  a  a  a  a 


a  a  a 


aaaaaaaaai 


w.Uf.a.ui.iri 


1  ■  “  a  r  a. 


i  a  a  a 


a  a  a  a  a  a  a 


a  a  a  a  a  a 


a  a  a  a  a 


